RAJALAKSHMI SRINIVASAN CHARTIABLE TRUST,CHENNAI vs. ASSESSING OFFICE NON CORPORATE WARD-8 (1), CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1232/CHNY/2023Status: DisposedITAT Chennai23 January 2024Bench: Mr.JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG (President), SHRI MANJUNATHA.G (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that there was an inadvertent error in the email address used by the CIT(Exemption), meaning proper service of notice was not effected. Consequently, the application needs to be restored to the CIT(Exemption) for disposal.

What were the facts?

The assessee's application for registration under Section 12AB of the Income Tax Act was rejected by the CIT(Exemption) for non-compliance. The CIT(Exemption) claimed the assessee did not respond to two emails. However, the assessee argued that the emails were sent to an incorrect address.

What were the issues?

Whether the rejection of the Section 12AB registration application was valid when the notices were sent to an incorrect email address, thus constituting improper service.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 12AB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: Mr.JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V. BHADANG & SHRI MANJUNATHA.G

Hearing: 23.01.2024Pronounced: 23.01.2024

आयकर अपीलसं./ITA No.: 1232/CHNY/2023 M/s. Rajalakshmi Srinivasan The Assessing Officer, Charitable Trust, vs. Non-Corporate Ward -8(1), 83-84, Perungudi Industrial Estate, Chennai. Perungudi, Chennai – 600 096. PAN: AAETR 6003L (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��यथ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� क� ओर से/Appellant by : Shri Vikram Vijayaraghavan, Advocate ��यथ� क� ओर से/Respondent by : Shri Nilay Baran Som, CIT सुनवाई क� तारीख/Date of Hearing : 23.01.2024 घोषणा क� तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 23.01.2024 आदेश /O R D E R PER JUSTICE (RETD.) C.V.BHADANG, PRESIDENT:

The challenge in this appeal at the instance of the appellant assessee is to the order dated 08.09.2023 passed by the CIT(Exemption), Chennai, thereby rejecting the application filed by the appellant seeking registration u/s.12AB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the ‘Act’) for non-compliance.

2.

We have heard the parties, perused the record. The ld.counsel for the appellant has taken us through paras 4 & 5 of the impugned order which refers to two emails, which according to the CIT(Exemption) have not been responded by the appellant. The 2 ld.counsel has pointed out at pages 12 & 13 of the paper-book in which the e-mail address on which these notices were sent reads as ‘arvindthyagarajan@spinfotegh.com’. The ld.counsel has pointed out that the correct e-mail address reads as ‘arvindthyagarajan@spincotech.com’. The ld.CIT-DR has also fairly conceded that there appears to be an inadvertent error in mentioning the e-mail address. Thus, it cannot be said that there was proper service of notice.

3.

In that view of the matter, we find that the application needs to be restored to the file of the CIT(Exemption) for disposal according to law. The appeal therefore succeeds. The impugned order is hereby set aside and the application u/s.12AB of the Act is restored back to the file of the CIT(Exemption) for disposal according to law.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on 23rd January, 2024 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 12AB

All 5,972 judgments and leading authorities on Section 12AB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →